Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 317 posts

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#211

Post by InitialLastName »

OutsmartDan wrote: post #147
milkytron wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is parking in a bike lane illegal? If so, would it be possible to citizen's arrest a cop for that? Or take them to court? Maybe it's an overreaction to a small crime, but it would set a precedent, no? Edit: I do not recommend trying to citizen's arrest a cop.

bike lane parking is just a form of "double parking", so theoretically it is illegal- however the laws of the road do not apply in NYC :)

Let me adjust that: The rules of the road (and common decency) do not apply to the NYPD.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#212

Post by u801e »

physguy1123 wrote: post #182
u801e wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can't tell you how many times i've almost been hit, or doored, by a car. Do you try to pass right turning vehicles on the right or left turning vehicles on the left? If you're at risk for getting doored, then you need to ride further away from parked vehicles (at least 6 feet away).

This doesn’t do anything when cars decide to park in your bike lane anyways, and your bike lane has maybe a foot clearance to traffic in the other side. It’s also an interesting attitude, that cars are so much more important than bikes that it’s not car drivers who should check the road when opening their door, but bikers who should lose the 6 feet of street space near parked cars which is the only semi-safe place fo…

> This doesn’t do anything when cars decide to park in your bike lane anyways

When there's a stopped vehicle in the lane you're in, you can simply check for traffic in the next lane and switch lanes.

> your bike lane has maybe a foot clearance to traffic in the other side.

You're not restricted to the bike lane if there's an obstruction.

> that cars are so much more important than bikes that it’s not car drivers who should check the road when opening their door

No one is saying that they shouldn't check before opening their door, but I am saying that you can eliminate the risk of being doored if you ride far enough away from parked vehicles. It's far easier to take responsibility for your own safety than to rely on others to do it for you.

> but bikers who should lose the 6 feet of street space near parked cars which is the only semi-safe place for bikes in New York

Riding in the door zone is not safe, period. It's safer to just ride in the general purpose traffic lane far enough away from parked vehicles. There's a reason why drivers of motor vehicles don't typically drive in the door zone.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#213

Post by u801e »

bobthepanda wrote: post #179
u801e wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can't tell you how many times i've almost been hit, or doored, by a car. Do you try to pass right turning vehicles on the right or left turning vehicles on the left? If you're at risk for getting doored, then you need to ride further away from parked vehicles (at least 6 feet away).

A lot of bike lanes in New York do not have six feet of separation from parked cars.

A lane that instructs you to ride in the door zone should be ignored. It's safer to ride in the center of the general purpose lane that's far enough from parked vehicles to avoid the risk of getting doored. Your safety is far more important than someone else's convenience.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#214

Post by rapnie »

adventured wrote: post #204
rapnie wrote: post #196

This is great! For inspiration: "From The Netherlands to America: Translating the world's best bikeway designs" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp3s2EP0zVo

The US is in a fortunate position with regards to public transportation. It doesn't need to invent anything new at all to dramatically improve its position: copy the things in Europe and places like Japan that work. It makes it all the more annoying that we're lagging so hard on the copying when it's so obvious.

Yes, true. Here is an overview (pdf) of bicycle infra design guidelines as they are used in a number of countries:

https://sutp.org/files/contents/documents/resources/F_Readin...

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#215

Post by lacampbell »

u801e wrote: post #212
physguy1123 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn’t do anything when cars decide to park in your bike lane anyways, and your bike lane has maybe a foot clearance to traffic in the other side. It’s also an interesting attitude, that cars are so much more important than bikes that it’s not car drivers who should check the road when opening their door, but bikers who should lose the 6 feet of street space near parked cars which is the only semi-safe place fo…

> This doesn’t do anything when cars decide to park in your bike lane anyways When there's a stopped vehicle in the lane you're in, you can simply check for traffic in the next lane and switch lanes. > your bike lane has maybe a foot clearance to traffic in the other side. You're not restricted to the bike lane if there's an obstruction. > that cars are so much more important than bikes that it’s not car drivers who…

I'm a long time cycle commuter and you are spot on. If your lane is obstructed, switch lanes. So much safer than just hoping you won't get doored.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#216

Post by Alex3917 »

quartz wrote: post #105
wefarrell wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I commute on my bike in NYC daily and I am far more terrified of pedestrians and other cyclists than I am of cars. Cars for the most part pay attention and obey traffic rules. Cyclists less so and pedestrians ignore rules entirely and frequently aren't even aware of cyclists.

You're being irrational with that fear. Cyclists are basically never killed by other cyclists or pedestrians. In fact, 5 of the last 8 years had zero pedestrian deaths due to collisions with cyclists. [1] [1] https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/bicyclists/bikestats.shtm...

The difference is that almost getting killed by a car happens only a few times per month, but having pedestrians step into the bike lane right in front of you without looking happens multiple times per day.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#217

Post by chaosbutters314 »

unlinked_dll wrote: post #23
pwthornton wrote: post #5

This is big time for America. If our biggest city can’t show leadership on pedestrian and bicyclist safety, we can’t expect any other city to as well. New York is really lagging behind where it should be. Despite being by far the biggest American city, it is overrun with cars. Protected bike lanes, street improvements to make crossing the street safer, and dedicated bus lanes will improve the city for all New Yorkers…

not to go all "blame the victim" here, but one thing I noticed culturally in NYC is that traffic lights are a suggestion to pedestrians. If there isn't a car directly in front of them, they'll cross the street. Compare to LA, where people tend to wait for the signal to cross pretty consistently. That said, LA still has horrible pedestrian death statistics so who knows how much that matters.

This. NYers do not respect crosswalks, jaywalking or rules of the road. It is chaos. People walk wherever and drive wherever. It is chaos. I was shocked to see the contrast between NYC and Montreal in terms of respecting the rules of road

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#218

Post by situational87 »

jacobreg wrote: post #98
bravoetch wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. NYC isn't some reference point for what other cities should do. Making a city bike friendly is available to all cities, and has been for decades. There's no trickle down bike policy, as other cities in the US are already showing.

It's not ridiculous to say the urbanest area should try to set an example for other urban areas

NYC is kind of a joke in urban planning circles, they have a lot of crazy ideas and have executed on approximately one of them in 20 years.

Many other cities are heads and shoulders ahead when it comes to rolling out proper separated bike lanes. Nobody is looking to NYC for leadership on anything in this field.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#219

Post by felipemnoa »

SwellJoe wrote: post #124
rb808 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netherlands and much Denmark aren't that cold in winter, many years it wont even snow. Further the summers are cool.

Not unlike New York City. But, how about Finland? They also ride bikes a lot more than most US cities, and Finland definitely has harsh winters. Edit: As for summers, I've regularly biked in Texas throughout the summer over many years (I've lived without a car quite a bit in Austin). The peak of the day is rough, but the usual commuting hours aren't too bad. New York has nothing on Texas summers.

>>Not unlike New York City

Don't know why I find this double negative so disturbing. Seems so unnecessary.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#220

Post by u801e »

nemo44x wrote: post #121

With more bikes because of bike lanes, I hope the city will begin enforcing bike infractions more seriously. So many people on bikes are going way too fast in the bike lanes (and pedestrian pathways) and do not stop at red lights, etc. I was happy to see a person get stopped and ticketed for riding down a walkway to a bike path when there was a sign explicitly stating that riding on the path was not allowed. I've see…

> So many people on bikes are going way too fast in the bike lanes (and pedestrian pathways)

This goes to show that bike infrastructure isn't practical for transportation. If you can't really use that infrastructure at speeds much faster than a pedestrian (3 to 6 mph), then it will take too long to get anywhere other than for the shortest trips. On the other hand, it's quite easy to safely go 10 to 30 mph on the actual road itself while taking the lane.

Post reply on HN